Wu nodded lightly. Li Yike's performance in court is getting better and better. He is calm and calm, and he can completely take charge of himself.
The young eagle can finally fly high, and the eagle is full of comfort.
"The defendant replied." Qin Han's voice interrupted Wu You's thoughts.
Yuan Wu said: "Dear presiding judge, I represent the defendant Lin Tan in the defense. 1. In this case, the plaintiff added a floor to the top of the house in dispute for sale, and did not obtain a construction project planning permit or a construction project construction permit. It is also impossible to go through the registration of property rights. In essence, the house in dispute is an illegal construction; 2. The subject matter of the sales contract signed by the plaintiff and the defendant is illegal, which falls under the provisions of Article 52, Item 5 of the Contract Law. The contract should be invalid. An invalid contract is invalid from the beginning. The plaintiff Peng Cheng and the defendant Lin Tan were both at fault for signing the contract, and the contract has not yet been performed. The plaintiff and the defendant have no losses, so they are not liable for any compensation. Therefore, the plaintiff should return the 100,000 yuan deposit paid by the defendant without interest.¡±
Wu You and Li Yike exchanged a look, and it turned out that Yuan Wu used the litigation strategy of "violating the mandatory provisions of laws and administrative regulations".
Both Wu You and Li Yike couldn't help showing joy, as if candidates had passed the exam questions.
Li Yike said: "The plaintiff believes that the contract is valid, and does not agree with the defendant's argument that the contract is invalid."
The premise of exercising the right to terminate the contract is that the contract must be established and effective. An invalid contract is invalid from the beginning, and the right to terminate the contract cannot be discussed, let alone the liability for breach of contract.
According to Article 94 of the "Contract Law", the parties may terminate the contract under any of the following circumstances: (1) the purpose of the contract cannot be achieved due to force majeure; (3) One of the parties delays in performing the main obligations, and fails to perform within a reasonable time after being urged; (4) One of the parties delays in performing the obligations or commits other breaches of the contract, so that the purpose of the contract cannot be realized; (5) The law other circumstances specified.
Wu You and Li Yike's strategy is to exercise the statutory right to terminate the contract by citing Article 94, Item 3 of the Contract Law.
However, Yuan Wu had to prove that the contract was invalid, Lin Tan did not need to bear any liability for breach of contract, and the deposit could be refunded.
Qin Han understands that this is a key point in this case: "This issue will not be discussed until the court debate stage. Next, we will first present evidence and cross-examination, and the plaintiff will present evidence first."
Li Yike said: "The plaintiff submitted the following pieces of evidence to the court: 1. A copy of the "Housing Sales Contract" signed by the plaintiff Peng Cheng and the defendant Lin Tan, which proves the sales relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant; The plaintiff, Peng Cheng, urged the plaintiff, and the defendant made it clear that he would not perform the contractual obligations."
Qin Han said: "The defendant cross-examined the evidence."
Yuan Wu said: "There is no objection to the authenticity and object of proof of the first piece of evidence submitted by the plaintiff, the Housing Sales Contract; there is no objection to the authenticity of the WeChat screenshot of the second piece of evidence, but there is objection to the object of proof. The defendant believes that the original The "Housing Sales Contract" signed between the defendants is illegal because the subject matter is illegal, so the contract itself is invalid, and the defendant does not need to continue to bear the responsibility for performance of the contract if it is invalid."
In the court trial game, the most important thing is that the train of thought should not be diverted by the other party, and follow the train of thought of the other party to refute it, but firmly stand firm on one's own position.
Qin Han said: "The defendant presents evidence."
Yuan Wu said: "The defendant submitted two pieces of evidence to the court. The first evidence is a copy of the real estate ownership certificate of the disputed house, which proves that the second floor of the disputed house has not obtained any planning procedures, has not obtained real estate ownership, and will not be possible in the future. Obtaining real estate ownership is an illegal construction; the second piece of evidence is a screenshot of the WeChat chat between the plaintiff and the defendant, which proves that the defendant Lin Tan has told the plaintiff Peng Cheng that the contract signed between the two parties is invalid and he does not need to perform the payment obligation , not the defendant¡¯s breach of contract; the third piece of evidence is the transfer certificate and receipt of the 100,000 yuan deposit paid by the defendant Lin Tan to the plaintiff Peng Cheng, proving the fact that the defendant Lin Tan paid the 100,000 yuan deposit to the plaintiff Peng Cheng, and Peng Cheng should The deposit of 100,000 yuan shall be returned to the defendant Lin Tan."
Qin Han said: "The plaintiff cross-examines evidence."
Li Yike said: "There is no objection to the authenticity of the first piece of evidence submitted by the defendant, but the object of the proof does not necessarily lead to the invalidation of the contract. In essence, one is a creditor's right, and the other is a property The two are two legal relationships. This will be discussed in the later stage of court debate."
? Tan Han, who was originally looking down at the file, raised his head slightly and looked at Li Yike, obviously attracted by Li Yike's point of view.
"For the second piece of evidence submitted by the defendant, the WeChat screenshots between the plaintiff and the defendant are not authentic.?? Objection, there is objection to the object of proof, the sales contract is a valid contract, the defendant should bear the liability for breach of contract if he fails to perform the contract; there is no objection to the authenticity of the third evidence transfer voucher and receipt submitted by the defendant, the plaintiff Peng Cheng did receive the defendant Lin Lin Tan paid a performance bond of 100,000 yuan on the day the contract was signed, but because the defendant Lin Tan breached the contract, the deposit penalty rules should apply, and the plaintiff confiscated the deposit paid by the defendant. "
The deposit is a certain amount of money paid before the conclusion of the contract or before its performance as a guarantee. One party to the contract pays the other party a certain amount of money in advance according to the contract to ensure the performance of the contract. and exist. In the sales contract, as long as the deposit clause is fixed, no matter which party to the contract breaches the contract, it must bear the loss equal to the deposit amount. In other words, if the party paying the deposit breaches the contract, it will lose the ownership of the deposit, and the deposit will belong to the party receiving the deposit. If the party receiving the deposit breaches the contract, in addition to returning the deposit paid by the payer, it shall also pay the payer an amount equal to the deposit. This method of ensuring the performance of the contract with a deposit is called the deposit penalty.
Qin Han asked: "Do the two sides have anything to add to the facts?"
Li Yike said: "No."
Yuan Wu said, "No."
Hearing this, Qin Han already knew very well that the facts of this case were not complicated, and the plaintiff and the defendant did not have any disputes about the facts. The focus of the dispute was whether the violation of the subject matter resulted in the violation of the creditor's rights contract.
This is not only a difficult problem in this case, the entire theoretical and practical circles are also arguing about it.
But it is such a difficult case that is challenging.
Qin Han looked at Wu You and Yuan Wu, and she was looking forward to the arguments of the two lawyers during the court debate. (Remember the site URL: www.hlnovel.com